|
|
|
|
| Re: Earthquake Forecasting Developments March 2, 2010 |
EARTHQUAKE FORECASTING DEVELOPMENTS March 2, 2010 [Forecasting? Or it that post-casting?] Several months ago my earthquake forecasting computer program finally got developed to the point where easily understood data could be generated in an efficient manner. And since then it is has been possible to devote some time to actually evaluating the data that are being generated. The results have been spectacular in my opinion. And research efforts are presently moving along so fast with so many different part of this effort that it has become difficult to even let people know what it taking place except with some E-mail notes. Here are some of the latest developments. ["opinion"...good choice of word.]
An earthquake sensitive in the Haiti area contacted me for information on this phenomenon. And we began comparing notes regarding the times when EM Signals are detected. So far his data appear to be in excellent agreement with my own. In one case we detected signals just 3 minutes apart. [Before or after? If after...how convenient. If before...then you are guilty like grant dependent scientist of keeping things close to the chest out of competitive paranoia...OR...you tell a nice story.]
He went to work in the popular and highly regarded Montana Hotel in Haiti on the morning of the earthquake. But he became so ill from earthquake sensitivity symptoms such as an intense headache that he had to return home. Later in the day the hotel was heavily damaged by the earthquake. And the last news report on it that I saw indicated that hundreds of people died inside it when the building was damaged. That included one person with whom the person I am in contact with was supposed to have been working that day. [How do you know it wasn't from the flue, a cold, a hangover from drug or alcohol use, etc.? An impending stroke? Care to explain how you eliminate competiting possbile causitive variables? What labs do you use?]
[With EQ sensitives like myself - I get only a 5-10 second head start to a doorway or outside when it's a biggie - I'm still along for the ride. Doesn't make me miserable. Define "normal"...]
Very roughly, 50% of the time when I detect an EM Signal the approaching earthquake responsible for it will occur within a few days. The rest of the time it can be delayed for weeks or even months. [Pick a window...roll the dice my friend...]
[So you won't pick a window nor roll the dice - but you are okay in picking volcanoes...heck...I would have just been consistent and grabbed the "Ring 'O Fire"]
http://www.earthwaves.org/wwwboard/messages/76223.html [Warnings are great and all...but not a prediction does it make. General forecasts for a "chance of rain tomorrow" are great and all...but what I really want is AM, NOON, PM and inches. Anyone can see the midnight halo around the moon and generalize as to what's coming - but that ain't good enough.] No earthquake that was a good match for the signal has ever been detected. However, time delays of multiples of a month between the signals and the earthquakes are not uncommon. And the February 27, 2010 date for that extremely powerful Chile earthquake plus the strength of the EM Signal suggest that the signal could have been an early precursor for that approaching earthquake. And if so then it is unfortunate that I could not do a better job with an exact location for the expected earthquake. If that signal was in fact associated with the Chile earthquake then other researchers might have been able to confirm that it was on the way. And some lives might have been saved. At the moment it looks like more than 700 people perished during the earthquake or because of the tsunami (tidal waves) it created. [Better job? You didn't even try!!! When the points possible are 0/0, don't put yourself down for getting a score of 0/0...that's an A+.]
Research contacts in the People’s Republic of China appear to have developed an electromagnetic energy field detector that can monitor some of the same types of EM Signals being detected by earthquake sensitive humans and probably some earthquake sensitive animals. [However you describe it, EM is EM...and are defined by frequencies, lengths, strengths, etc. Different events fall all over the spectrum...and nothing precludes different events from sharing spectrum space. Until you have a proven way via scientific review of determining that so-and-so EM event is EQ related and NOTHING BUT...you are getting nowhere.]
So, that makes 5 people or groups around the world with whom I am in contact who appear to be monitoring the same type signals. This is allowing forecasting research to move along with increasing speed. Additionally I have two other contacts who are actively monitoring different types of EM Signal. And we are comparing notes on them. At the moment I am working on a Web Page report that provides some information on that earthquake sensitivity type EM Signal detector. And when it is finalized I plan to post a note about it. I am also planning to try to help those researchers get a U.S. patent for their new detector. Their cost estimate for a complete unit is about $2000 US. However I myself feel that with performance improvements and mass-production techniques the cost could probably be reduced to perhaps the $100 to $500 range making the detector affordable by virtually any research institution and even many independent researchers. The detector can fit on a laboratory bench. It doesn’t need any contacts with the ground. And EM Signals can apparently be detected for earthquakes occurring around the world. The one presently running unit in China detected such a strong signal 7 minutes before that recent powerful Chile earthquake that it stopped running. The system had to be shut down and restarted. [Verification please? Publication? Journal submission?] There are 3 other people or groups that I know of who might have developed earthquake sensitivity type detectors that are radically different from this latest one. Two of the groups are in the U.S. One is in India. Unfortunately, I have never been able to establish good communications contacts with any of those other groups. [Suggestion: You have a horrible habit of using the following qualifiers when making supposedly confident statements: Might, possible, soon, could have, probably, suggests...the list is exhaustive. You would engender a great deal more confidence in yourself and others with your results if you would simply pick a window, pick a mag., pick a range, pick a neighborhood, pick a date - and let the dice roll.]
Robert Shackelford
|
|
|
|
|
